IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v63y2013icp299-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How survey design affects self-assessed health responses in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE)

Author

Listed:
  • Lumsdaine, Robin L.
  • Exterkate, Anneke

Abstract

This paper considers the role of question order and framing in evaluating subjective health assessment responses using the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) dataset. In the first wave of this dataset respondents were twice asked to evaluate their health on a five-point scale, using two different sets of descriptors to define the five points, with the ordering of which set was first administered determined randomly. We document differences in inference in comparing those that were asked one question first versus those that were asked the other. We then consider determinants of the degree of concordance in responses to the two questions, as well as the characteristics of individuals that provide conflicting responses. Consistent with previous research for England (Bowling and Windsor, 2008. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 62, 81–85), there is evidence for eleven countries in Europe that individuals’ assessments of their health in response to the second question may be influenced by the battery of health questions that were asked following the first assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Lumsdaine, Robin L. & Exterkate, Anneke, 2013. "How survey design affects self-assessed health responses in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE)," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 299-307.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:299-307
    DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292113000755
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crossley, Thomas F. & Kennedy, Steven, 2002. "The reliability of self-assessed health status," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 643-658, July.
    2. Susann Rohwedder & Steven J. Haider & Michael D. Hurd, 2006. "INCREASES IN WEALTH AMONG THE ELDERLY IN THE EARLY 1990s: HOW MUCH IS DUE TO SURVEY DESIGN?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 52(4), pages 509-524, December.
    3. Susann Rohwedder & Steven J. Haider & Michael D. Hurd, 2006. "INCREASES IN WEALTH AMONG THE ELDERLY IN THE EARLY 1990s: HOW MUCH IS DUE TO SURVEY DESIGN?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 52(4), pages 509-524, December.
    4. Teresa Bago d’Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O’Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Slipping Anchor?: Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 46(4), pages 875-906.
    5. Erik Meijer & Arie Kapteyn & Tatiana Andreyeva, 2011. "Internationally comparable health indices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(5), pages 600-619, May.
    6. Lindeboom, Maarten & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2004. "Cut-point shift and index shift in self-reported health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1083-1099, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kim, Y-S. & Lee, M-J., 2016. "Generalized Difference in Differences for Ordinal Responses with a Varying Number of Categories," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/19, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    2. repec:eee:socmed:v:191:y:2017:i:c:p:9-18 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Concordance; Survey bias; Subjective response; Question order;

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:299-307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.